FreedomRings
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
- Messages
- 371
So I watched the Revolution March video and on second viewing I really, really like it. But I'm sure it will turn off a lot of people who watch it only once because it is so angry and has "violence" written all over it.
Turbulent music, rousing quotes, violent imagery (boot in the sand) etc... If I were someone sitting on the fence I'd be afraid to go to that march because I'd expect violence to happen.
The government would probably want for things to get violent at a time they can still control it, allowing them to discredit the entire movement. They could send agents provocateurs and then say, "look at their video, no wonder they started shooting" or whatever.
Another way to think about it: Can you imagine Ron Paul putting up that video at his site and/or openly associating himself with it? I can't...
Don't get me wrong, I really love the video, I just don't think it will allow us to maximize our numbers.
Thoughts?
PS: If nothing else, the makers should at least fix the two grammatical errors at 1:08:
"Our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." (not it's).
Plus 1:58 who's -> whose
Turbulent music, rousing quotes, violent imagery (boot in the sand) etc... If I were someone sitting on the fence I'd be afraid to go to that march because I'd expect violence to happen.
The government would probably want for things to get violent at a time they can still control it, allowing them to discredit the entire movement. They could send agents provocateurs and then say, "look at their video, no wonder they started shooting" or whatever.
Another way to think about it: Can you imagine Ron Paul putting up that video at his site and/or openly associating himself with it? I can't...
Don't get me wrong, I really love the video, I just don't think it will allow us to maximize our numbers.
Thoughts?
PS: If nothing else, the makers should at least fix the two grammatical errors at 1:08:
"Our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." (not it's).
Plus 1:58 who's -> whose
Last edited: